Appeal No. 1996-3659
Application No. 08/237,484
facie case of unpatentability.” See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d
1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992). The
examiner relies upon a combination of two references to reject
the claimed subject matter and establish a prima facie case of
obviousness. The basic premise of the rejection is that the
primary reference to Boszormenyi discloses a method, “of
forming a porous zeolitic film on a substrate.” See Answer, 3
page 4. The premise is based on the examiner’s finding that
zeolites are by definition porous. Accordingly, any
replication of the stoichiometry would result in a film which
would likewise be porous. See Answer, page 6. We disagree.
Zeolites have pores which are determined by the unit structure
of the crystal. However, on the record before us, we find no
evidence that the resulting films deposited by Boszormenyi are
necessarily crystalline porous zeolite films. Indeed,
Boszormenyi repeatedly states that he prepares thin films of
silica-alumina and we so find. See Abstract, pages 344, 352
and Figure 1. Moreover, at pages 354 and 355, Boszormenyi
refers to the preparation of amorphous thin films. Based upon
3Emphasis ours.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007